6 ms·
Did you also notice that the way the Guardian wrote that paragraph makes it sound like Apple turned away the mayor, when in fact he was not the mayor at the tim
by eeeeeeeeeeeee 10y ago
Did you also notice that the way the Guardian wrote that paragraph makes it sound like Apple turned away the mayor, when in fact he was not the mayor at the time he went to Apple unannounced.
I cannot read that any other way except to intentionally mislead people for a greater impact on the story. I really hate this kind of journalism.
"The last time the mayor of Cupertino walked into Apple"
Yes, he is the current mayor since Dec 2015, but he was not when he "walked in to Apple."
From the article:
"“They said ‘you cannot come in, you’re not invited’. After that I left and have not gone back,” said an exasperated Chang, who’s been mayor since December 2015 and had approached the computing firm when he was serving on the city council three years ago."
He was on city council, he was not the mayor, when he went to Apple unannounced and was turned away. And I'm glad Apple turned him away -- why does he think he can show up anywhere unannounced just because of his title, be that mayor or city council member?
This is on top of this entire bullshit article, which as others have pointed out, says nothing about actual local/state taxes that Apple is not paying (because i'm sure they're probably in compliance). This article really comes down to "Mayor says life isn't fair, wants reparations."
- kafkaesq 10y agoI cannot read that any other way except to intentionally mislead people for a greater impact on the story. It was a bit careless on their part. Most likely the author simply didn't know when the uninvited visit occurred didn't think to double check. In general I don't see much benefit in imputing malicious motives to others, when far simpler explanations will suffice.
- wutbrodo 10y agoThis would be a reasonable approach if we weren't talking about a piece of published journalism. That makes it both more unlikely that it was accidental (due to a higher bar of fact-checking), and more blameworthy even if it was due to negligence.
- kafkaesq 10y agoWhat can I say? If you're looking for bad actors and intentional wrongdoers behind every mishap in the world... then that's the kind of world you'll end up living in.
- vithlani 10y agoI have increasingly been noticing such writing from the Guardian. Witness this: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/05/republican-nomination-donald-trump-campaign-state-primaries-delegates-convention http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/05/republican-no... It is so damn clear that this guy is the nominee that even his most obstinate, pig-headed and ESTABLISHMENT funded opponent has withdrawn -- and yet the Guardian says he faces a "difficult" path.